Dredla v. Valmont Industries, Inc., 091120 NEWC, 0572

Case DateSeptember 11, 2020
CourtNebraska
LARRY DREDLA, Plaintiff,
v.
VALMONT INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant.
No. 0572
Doc. 216
Nebraska Workers' Compensation
September 11, 2020
          Travis A. Spier Attorney at Law Atwood, Holsten, Brown, Deaver & Spier Law Firm, PC, LLO           William J. Birkel Attorney at Law McGrath, North, Mullin & Kratz, PC, LLO          ORDER           DANIEL R. FRIDRICH, JUDGE.          On this 8th day of September, 2020, this matter came on for hearing on the plaintiffs Motion to Compel and Request for Sanctions and Attorney Fees Pursuant to Neb. Ct. R. Disc. § 6-337. Plaintiff was represented by Travis Spier. Defendant was represented by Bill Birkel. Exhibits 23 through 45 were received into evidence for the sole purpose of resolving the plaintiff s motion. Counsel for the defendant objected to Exhibit 35, and that objection was overruled.          On July 24, 2020, this Court entered an Order, ordering the defendant to "more fully respond to Interrogatory number 14. Defendant shall specifically state which documents it is relying upon in denying any of the 20 Requests for Admission it denied. As an example, defendant shall state: 'Defendant relies upon the medical report from Dr. Emmett Brown dated November 5, 1955 to deny Request for Admission number 6.' Defendant shall also state specifically whether any witnesses is anticipated to testify in support of its denial of any Request for Admission." (E28, p. 2).          Plaintiff s motion alleges that defendant failed to comply with the Court's Order of July 24, 2020. Defendant denied 20 Requests for Admission served upon it by the defendant. Interrogatory number 14 reads: "For each of Plaintiff s Requests for Admission denied by Defendant, identify the basis for the denial and identify each and every item of evidence or anticipated testimony to offer at trial to support the denial." (E45, p. 1).          Plaintiff filed this motion asking the Court to order the defendant to more fully respond to Interrogatory number 14. Plaintiffs main argument at the hearing was that defendant never specified which medical reports or records to which it was referring in its Answers to...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT